Elections

It is one of the moments in his upcoming memoir that the former defense secretary described as leaving him all but speechless.President Donald J. Trump in 2020 asked Mark T. Esper, his defense secretary, about the possibility of launching missiles into Mexico to “destroy the drug labs” and wipe out the cartels, maintaining that the United States’ involvement in a strike against its southern neighbor could be kept secret, Mr. Esper recounts in his upcoming memoir.Those remarkable discussions were among several moments that Mr. Esper described in the book, “A Sacred Oath,” as leaving him all but speechless when he served the 45th president.Mr. Esper, the last Senate-confirmed defense secretary under Mr. Trump, also had concerns about speculation that the president might misuse the military around Election Day by, for instance, having soldiers seize ballot boxes. He warned subordinates to be on alert for unusual calls from the White House in the lead-up to the election.The book, to be published on Tuesday, offers a stunningly candid perspective from a former defense secretary, and it illuminates key episodes from the Trump presidency, including some that were unknown or underexplored.“I felt like I was writing for history and for the American people,” said Mr. Esper, who underwent the standard Pentagon security clearance process to check for classified information. He also sent his writing to more than two dozen four-star generals, some cabinet members and others to weigh in on accuracy and fairness.Pressed on his view of Mr. Trump, Mr. Esper — who strained throughout the book to be fair to the man who fired him while also calling out his increasingly erratic behavior after his first impeachment trial ended in February 2020 — said carefully but bluntly, “He is an unprincipled person who, given his self-interest, should not be in the position of public service.”A spokesman for Mr. Trump did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Mr. Esper describes an administration completely overtaken by concerns about Mr. Trump’s re-election campaign, with every decision tethered to that objective. He writes that he could have resigned, and weighed the idea several times, but that he believed the president was surrounded by so many yes-men and people whispering dangerous ideas to him that a loyalist would have been put in Mr. Esper’s place. The real act of service, he decided, was staying in his post to ensure that such things did not come to pass.One such idea emerged from Mr. Trump, who was unhappy about the constant flow of drugs across the southern border, during the summer of 2020. Mr. Trump asked Mr. Esper at least twice if the military could “shoot missiles into Mexico to destroy the drug labs.”“They don’t have control of their own country,” Mr. Esper recounts Mr. Trump saying.When Mr. Esper raised various objections, Mr. Trump said that “we could just shoot some Patriot missiles and take out the labs, quietly,” adding that “no one would know it was us.” Mr. Trump said he would just say that the United States had not conducted the strike, Mr. Esper recounts, writing that he would have thought it was a joke had he not been staring Mr. Trump in the face.In Mr. Esper’s telling, Mr. Trump seemed more emboldened, and more erratic, after he was acquitted in his first impeachment trial. Mr. Esper writes that personnel choices reflected that reality, as Mr. Trump tried to tighten his grip on the executive branch with demands of personal loyalty.Among Mr. Trump’s desires was to put 10,000 active-duty troops on the streets of Washington on June 1, 2020, after large protests against police brutality erupted following the police killing of George Floyd. Mr. Trump asked Mr. Esper about the demonstrators, “Can’t you just shoot them?”Mr. Esper describes one episode nearly a month earlier during which Mr. Trump, whose re-election prospects were reshaped by his repeated bungling of the response to the coronavirus pandemic, behaved so erratically at a May 9 meeting about China with the Joint Chiefs of Staff that one officer grew alarmed. The unidentified officer confided to Mr. Esper months later that the meeting led him to research the 25th Amendment, under which the vice president and members of the cabinet can remove a president from office, to see what was required and under what circumstances it might be used.Mr. Esper writes that he never believed Mr. Trump’s conduct rose to the level of needing to invoke the 25th Amendment. He also strains to give Mr. Trump credit where he thinks he deserves it. Nonetheless, Mr. Esper paints a portrait of someone not in control of his emotions or his thought process throughout 2020.Mr. Esper singles out officials whom he considered erratic or dangerous influences on Mr. Trump, with the policy adviser Stephen Miller near the top of the list. He recounts that Mr. Miller proposed sending 250,000 troops to the southern border, claiming that a large caravan of migrants was en route. “The U.S. armed forces don’t have 250,000 troops to send to the border for such nonsense,” Mr. Esper writes that he responded.In October 2019, after members of the national security team assembled in the Situation Room to watch a feed of the raid that killed the Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Mr. Miller proposed securing Mr. al-Baghdadi’s head, dipping it in pig’s blood and parading it around to warn other terrorists, Mr. Esper writes. That would be a “war crime,” Mr. Esper shot back.Mr. Miller flatly denied the episode and called Mr. Esper “a moron.”Mr. Esper also viewed Mark Meadows, Mr. Trump’s final White House chief of staff, as a huge problem for the administration and the national security team in particular. Mr. Meadows often threw the president’s name around when barking orders, but Mr. Esper makes clear that he often was not certain whether Mr. Meadows was communicating what Mr. Trump wanted or what Mr. Meadows wanted.He also writes about repeated clashes with Robert C. O’Brien, Mr. Trump’s national security adviser in the final year, describing Mr. O’Brien as advocating a bellicose approach to Iran without considering the potential fallout.Mr. O’Brien said he was “surprised and disappointed” by Mr. Esper’s comments. More

Here’s what you need to know at the end of the day.(Want to get this newsletter in your inbox? Here’s the sign-up.)Good evening. Here’s the latest at the end of Thursday.Mifepristone, the first of two drugs typically taken for a medication abortion, is authorized for patients up to 10 weeks pregnant.Michelle Mishina-Kunz for The New York Times1. Senate Democrats planned a surely doomed vote on Roe. The Senate’s majority leader, Chuck Schumer, said he will introduce a bill next week that codifies abortion rights into federal law, following the leaked Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade. The bill will almost certainly fall short of the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster or even obtain a simple majority.Still, Schumer called the vote one of “the most important we ever take,” framing it as a reminder to voters of the party’s stance. A majority of Americans support some form of abortion. If the Court overturns Roe, medication abortions, which account for more than half of recent abortions, will be the next battleground. A senior official said that the Biden administration is looking for further steps to increase access to all types of abortion, including the pill method.In other fallout, a stark divide has grown between Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. and Justice Samuel Alito Jr., author of the leaked decision. A Russian tank stuck in mud outside the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv.Daniel Berehulak for The New York Times2. The U.S. shared intelligence that helped Ukraine kill Russian generals. About 12 have died, according to Ukrainian officials, an astonishingly high number.The Biden administration’s help is part of a classified effort to give Ukraine real-time battlefield intelligence. Officials wouldn’t specify how many of the generals were killed with U.S. assistance and denied that the intelligence is provided with the intent to kill Russian generals.“Heavy, bloody battles” were fought at the Azovstal steel plant in Mariupol, the city’s last pocket of resistance, after Russian forces breached the perimeter. Seizing Mariupol would let President Vladimir Putin claim a major victory before Moscow’s Victory Day celebration on May 9.Fighting raged across the eastern front, from Mariupol to the northern Donetsk area. “The front is swinging this way and that,” a Ukrainian medic told The Times.The W.H.O. estimated roughly 930,000 more people than normal died in the U.S. by the end of 2021.Kirsten Luce for The New York Times3. Nearly 15 million more people died during the first two years of the pandemic than would have been expected during normal times.That estimate, which came from a panel of experts the World Health Organization assembled, offered a startling glimpse of how drastically the death counts reported by many governments have understated the pandemic’s toll.Most of the deaths were from Covid, the experts said, but some people died because the pandemic made it more difficult to get medical care for ailments such as heart attacks. The previous toll, based solely on death counts reported by countries, was six million.In other virus news, BA.2.12.1, a subvariant of the BA.2 Omicron subvariant, is likely to soon become the dominant form of the virus in the U.S. There’s no indication yet that it causes more severe disease.A Modoc National Forest firefighter used a drip torch to ignite a prescribed burn in Alturas, Calif., last year.Max Whittaker for The New York Times4. Fire season has arrived earlier than ever.Enormous wildfires have already consumed landscapes in Arizona and Nebraska. More than a dozen wildfires are raging this month across the Southwest. Summer is still more than a month and a half away.A time-lapse image from space shows the scope of the Western catastrophe: Smoke from fires in New Mexico can be seen on a collision course with a huge dust storm in Colorado. Both are examples of natural disasters made more severe and frequent by climate change, which has also made a vital tool for controlling wildfires — intentional burns — much riskier.The country’s largest active blaze, a megafire of more than 160,000 acres in northern New Mexico, has grown with such ferocity that it has threatened a multigenerational culture that has endured for centuries.A polling station in Shipley, England, where local elections could decide Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s fate.Mary Turner for The New York Times5. Britain is holding local elections in a big test for Prime Minister Boris Johnson.His scandal-prone leadership is again on the line, with Conservatives trailing the Labour Party in polls and his own lawmakers mulling a no-confidence motion that could evict him from Downing Street. A poor election result could tip them over the edge.One thing that has saved Johnson so far is his reputation as an election winner and his strength in the so-called red wall regions of the north and middle of England, which have traditionally voted Labour. Many voters are skeptical that the opposition can solve issues such as soaring prices.Elon Musk’s recent purchase of Twitter has left users and investors unsure of how the site will change. Joshua Lott/Getty Images6. Elon Musk has brought in 18 new investors and $7 billion for his Twitter deal.Among them are Larry Ellison, who put in $1 billion; Fidelity; and the venture capital firm Sequoia Capital. Musk is paying $21 billion from his own very deep pocket, and an investment firm analyst called Musk’s move a smart deal. In 2019, Musk tweeted “I hate advertising,” — but ads account for about 90 percent of Twitter revenue. Some agencies already say Twitter ads aren’t targeted well. Now, numerous advertising executives say they’re willing to move their money elsewhere, especially if he removes the safeguards that allowed Twitter to remove racist rants and conspiracy theories. Musk has mentioned potentially charging some users.Two of our colleagues, John Eligon and Lynsey Chutel, interviewed friends and relatives — including Musk’s estranged father — in South Africa, where he grew up, to better understand the mysterious entrepreneur.Russia-Ukraine War: Key DevelopmentsCard 1 of 4In Mariupol. More

More from our inbox:J.D. Vance’s Victory, With an Assist From TrumpU.S. Help in Targeting Russian Generals in UkraineIf Madison Were Omar … To the Editor:Re “How Tucker Carlson Stoked White Fear to Conquer Cable News” and “Tucker Carlson Reshaped Fox News, and Became Trump’s Heir” (“American Nationalist” series, front page, May 1 and 2):Congratulations to The New York Times for an exceptional piece of journalism exposing Tucker Carlson for what he is — an insidious infection coursing through the veins of America.It’s been said that the demise of America will come not from without but from within. We have survived Father Coughlin, Joseph McCarthy and others like them.Fortunately there are more people in America like Mister Rogers than Tucker Carlson.Aaron R. EshmanSanta Monica, Calif.To the Editor:Has The Times learned nothing at all from the election of the former guy? The amount of free publicity given to him by The Times as well as other mainstream media helped propel him to the presidency. Now you are giving free publicity to a Fox News host.Have you never heard the saying “There’s no such thing as bad publicity”? I haven’t read a word of any of your articles about Tucker Carlson because I won’t spend a moment of my life to learn more about this awful person. Stop offering him what he wants more than anything: attention.Deborah WeeksNorristown, Pa.To the Editor:Is Tucker Carlson the problem, or is it the number of insecure Americans willing to accept and act upon his divisive, hate-filled and false commentaries?Glenn P. EisenHastings-on-Hudson, N.Y.To the Editor:I tuned in when “Tucker Carlson Tonight” premiered on Fox, in November 2016. And I have watched him ever since. This man is a breath of fresh air. He just says out loud what millions and millions of people are feeling. “Tucker Carlson Tonight” is my one hour of sanity.He is not going away. He will only get stronger.Mary D. BrownKirkland, Wash.To the Editor:Tucker Carlson: laughing all the way to the bank. His audience: cheering like never before. Fox: loving it. Republicans in Congress: Tucker for president. Vladimir Putin to his P.R. goons: Write down everything Tucker says.Earth to The New York Times and my fellow blue state people: Stop whining. We know he’s an evil genius, a master of propaganda, a liar and a con man. There’s a word for that. It’s called politics.The issue is not how awful this guy is. It’s what the Democrats are going to do to respond in kind with their own evil geniuses.Marc BloomPrinceton, N.J.To the Editor:Tucker Carlson is smart, he’s funny and he speaks in compound sentences. That’s why he has more than three million viewers. You just gave him another million.Antonia TamplinBronxTo the Editor:On Sunday I was surprised to see a front-page story on Tucker Carlson. I was stunned that it continued inside for several pages, with an additional exhaustive feature on his show’s content. Surprisingly, I read it all. I almost never watch Fox News, so I attributed my attention to the know-thine-enemy factor.I just opened Monday’s Times. There he is again. Yikes! Tuckered out, I’m flipping straight to Sports.Sandy TreadwellOjai, Calif.J.D. Vance’s Victory, With an Assist From TrumpJ.D. Vance on stage in Cincinnati after winning the Ohio Republican Senate primary.Maddie McGarvey for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “With Trump’s Nod, Vance Rallies to Win Senate Primary in Ohio” (front page, May 4):Donald Trump and his minions have turned our political system into a twisted version of “The Apprentice,” where the path to elected office begins with a trip to Mar-a-Lago to kiss Mr. Trump’s ring.In Ohio, J.D. Vance is the latest beneficiary of this deranged process, despite his previous “Never Trump” position. We know that many Republicans privately view Mr. Trump with contempt and understand the danger of his norm-busting antics, yet they continue to sacrifice their values to worship at the altar of Trump. Republicans appear willing to do and say anything to grab and hold onto power, no matter the costs to the country.Who could have imagined some Republicans praising Russia’s aggression, or railing against free trade, a generation ago? We are well on our way to minority rule in this country, and Democrats still play by rules that don’t seem to apply to Republicans any longer. It’s time to get rid of the filibuster so Democrats can make the most of what little power they have left.Dorothy SuppSycamore Township, OhioU.S. Help in Targeting Russian Generals in UkrainePresident Vladimir V. Putin of Russia and Gen. Valery Gerasimov, Russia’s highest-ranking uniformed officer. Ukrainians struck a location where General Gerasimov had visited, acting on their intelligence.Sergei Guneyev/Sputnik, via Agence France-PresseTo the Editor:Re “U.S. Helped Kyiv in Targeting Russian Generals” (front page, May 5):I can’t help but think that the newsworthiness of this information pales in comparison to the potential harm that its disclosure will cause.The U.S. is trying very hard to avoid direct involvement in the Russia-Ukraine war and the repercussions that Vladimir Putin would insist on enacting against it. Helping cause the deaths of Russian generals could certainly be perceived as having crossed that line.Does The New York Times take that into consideration when releasing such information?Neil RauchBaltimoreIf Madison Were Omar …Madison Cawthorn was previously fined for trying to bring a gun through airport security in February 2021.Cooper Neill for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Police Accuse Lawmaker of Trying to Fly With Gun” (news article, April 27), about Representative Madison Cawthorn trying to bring a gun through airport security:Instead of this ultraright white man, imagine this story being about another professional American man, this one with swarthy skin and named Omar, who was twice caught trying to bring a loaded gun onto a commercial flight. Wouldn’t that guy be put on the no-fly list?Faith FrankelBoonton, N.J. More

SÃO PAULO, Brasil — Quando Elon Musk fechou um acordo para comprar o Twitter, os grupos brasileiros de direita no Telegram foram à loucura. Ali estava, enfim, um poderoso defensor da liberdade de expressão. Mais que isso, ali estava alguém que – como os usuários se apressaram a confirmar – queria Carlos Bolsonaro, filho do presidente da República, como presidente do Twitter no Brasil.É claro que isso não era verdade. Mas não fiquei nem um pouco surpresa. Tenho seguido esses grupos no aplicativo de mensagens há semanas, a fim de entender como a desinformação é disseminada em tempo real. No Brasil, as fake news parecem ser algo que atinge a população em geral – o Telegram apenas oferece um tipo de buraco de coelho dos mais profundos onde se pode cair. De modo que eu sabia – a partir de uma experiência horrível e capaz de derreter as retinas – que, para muitos ativistas de direita, as fake news se tornaram um artigo de fé, uma arma de guerra, a forma mais certeira de turvar o debate público.“Fake news faz parte da nossa vida”, disse o presidente Jair Bolsonaro no ano passado, ao receber um prêmio de comunicações oferecido por seu próprio Ministério das Comunicações. (Não dá pra ser mais orwelliano do que isso, certo?) “A internet é um sucesso”, ele prosseguiu. “Não precisamos de regular isso aí. Deixemos o povo à vontade.”Dá para entender a lógica. Afinal, as fake news produziram uma suposta manchete do The Washington Post que dizia: “Bolsonaro é o melhor presidente de todos os tempos” – e alegaram que uma recente motociata em apoio ao presidente entrou para o Guinness World Records. Contudo, meu mergulho nos grupos de Telegram do país revelou algo mais sinistro do que notícias adulteradas. Desregulados, extremos e delirantes, esses grupos servem para difamar os inimigos do presidente e conduzir uma operação oculta de propaganda. Não é de admirar que Bolsonaro esteja tão ávido para manter uma atmosfera de vale-tudo.O grande alvo é o principal adversário de Bolsonaro nas eleições de outubro, o ex-presidente Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. Em grupos bolsonaristas de tamanho médio, como “Os Patriotas Br” (11.782 membros) e “Bolsonaro 2022 – Grupo de Apoio!” (25.737 membros), o foco é implacável. Usuários disseminaram à exaustão uma foto digitalmente alterada de um Lula sem camisa de mãos dadas com o presidente da Venezuela Nicolás Maduro, como se eles tivessem sido um casal homossexual nos anos 1980. (Preciso dizer que é falsa?)As alegações são infindáveis e excêntricas: Lula é patrocinado pelo narcotráfico; ele irá perseguir Igrejas; ele é contra as pessoas de classe média terem mais de uma televisão em casa. As pessoas usam tudo o que podem. Um vídeo obviamente satírico – que mostra um ator como se fosse um dos advogados do Partido dos Trabalhadores, confessando praticar fraude eleitoral – é ostentado como prova absoluta e irrefutável. O nome do advogado, “Avacalho Ellhys”, ou seja, “eu avacalho eles”, deveria ter sido suficiente para entregar o jogo. Mas em seu afã de demonização, os seguidores de Bolsonaro não são exatamente dados a uma leitura atenta.Por trás dessa atividade frenética está um desespero mal disfarçado. Segundo a pesquisa eleitoral mais recente, Lula está em primeiro lugar com 41% das intenções de voto, contra 36% de Bolsonaro. A realidade da popularidade de Lula é claramente muito dolorosa de se suportar, de modo que os usuários de Telegram buscam refúgio na fantasia. “Até que enfim uma pesquisa de verdade”, disse um usuário, alegando que um instituto imaginário de pesquisa colocou Bolsonaro em primeiro lugar com 65% das intenções de voto, contra 16% de seu adversário. Quando inventar pesquisas não é suficiente, sempre se pode suspender a corrida. “Com medo de prisão internacional, Lula vai desistir da disputa”, alegou outro. O anseio é quase tocante.Os apoiadores de Bolsonaro têm outro bicho-papão: o Supremo Tribunal Federal, que abriu inúmeras investigações contra o presidente, seus filhos e aliados. No Telegram, esse escrutínio não foi bem recebido. As pessoas acusam os ministros do STF de defender publicamente o estupro, a pedofilia, o homicídio, o narcotráfico e o tráfico de órgãos. Eles disseminam uma foto manipulada de um ministro posando ao lado de Fidel Castro. Eles espalham um vídeo editado no qual outro ministro confessa estar sofrendo chantagem do PT por participar de uma orgia em Cuba. (O ministro realmente disse isso – mas ele estava dando um exemplo bizarro de fake news contra ele, um rumor que o próprio Bolsonaro ajudou a criar no Twitter.)Uns poucos passos foram tomados para conter esse dilúvio de fake news. Algumas plataformas de mídia social removeram vídeos do presidente que propagavam desinformação sobre a Covid-19 e o sistema de urnas eletrônicas. O WhatsApp decidiu não lançar no Brasil uma nova ferramenta chamada Comunidades, que agrega vários grupos menores, até o fim das eleições presidenciais. Em março, o STF baniu o Telegram por dois dias porque a empresa estava ignorando as ordens da Corte de remover um post enganoso sobre o sistema eleitoral brasileiro publicado na conta oficial do presidente (1.34 milhão de membros). A empresa então concordou em adotar algumas medidas contra a desinformação, incluindo o monitoramento diário manual dos 100 canais mais populares do Brasil e uma parceria futura com organizações de checagem. Um problemático projeto de lei contra as fake news está sendo considerado pelo Congresso.Não é nem de longe o suficiente. Uma recente investigação da Polícia Federal identificou um sistema orquestrado – o chamado “gabinete do ódio” – formado por aliados próximos a Bolsonaro, e provavelmente também seus filhos e assessores. O objetivo do grupo é supostamente identificar alvos como políticos, cientistas, ativistas e jornalistas, e então criar e propagar desinformação para “ganhos ideológicos, político-partidários e financeiros”. (Todos eles negam as acusações.) O problema é muito maior do que alguns poucos e dispersos posts de lunáticos.No fim das contas, não sabemos o que pode ser feito para conter de forma efetiva as campanhas massivas de desinformação nas plataformas de mídia social, sobretudo às vésperas de importantes eleições nacionais. Como é possível argumentar com pessoas que acreditam que “os esquerdistas permitem que bebês sejam mortos 28 dias após o nascimento” ou que “a vacina possui parasita que pode ser controlado por impulsos eletromagnéticos”? Alguns especialistas defendem incluir rótulos de checagem, tornar mais difícil o compartilhamento de mensagens ou implementar a verificação dos usuários. Nenhuma dessas medidas, acredito, seria suficiente para refrear a maré de insanidade que encontrei no Telegram.Pelo menos há uma solução à qual sempre podemos recorrer: votar para demover do cargo os políticos que defendem as fake news.Vanessa Barbara é a editora do sítio literário A Hortaliça, autora de dois romances e dois livros de não-ficção em português, e escritora de opinião do The New York Times. More

SÃO PAULO, Brasil — Cuando Elon Musk llegó a un acuerdo para comprar Twitter, los grupos de derecha en Telegram se volvieron locos. Por fin había un sólido defensor de la libertad de expresión. Además, se trataba de alguien que —los usuarios se apresuraron a confirmar— quería que Carlos Bolsonaro, hijo del presidente, fuera el director general de Twitter en Brasil.Eso, por supuesto, no era cierto. Pero no me sorprendió. Llevaba semanas siguiendo a esos grupos en la aplicación de mensajería para ver cómo se difundía la desinformación en tiempo real. En Brasil, las noticias falsas parecen ser algo de lo que la población en general aparentemente es víctima; Telegram simplemente ofrece el tipo de agujero negro más profundo en el que se puede caer. Así que supe —por una experiencia horrible, que me dejó boquiabierta— que para muchos activistas de derecha, las noticias falsas se han convertido en un artículo de fe, un arma de guerra, la forma más segura de opacar el debate público.“Las noticias falsas son parte de nuestras vidas”, dijo el presidente Jair Bolsonaro el año pasado, mientras recibía un premio de comunicación de su propio Ministerio de Comunicaciones. (No se puede ser más orwelliano, ¿verdad?). “Internet es un éxito”, continuó. “No necesitamos regularlo. Dejemos que la gente se sienta libre”.Se puede entender su punto de vista. Después de todo, las noticias falsas produjeron un titular supuestamente en The Washington Post que decía: “Bolsonaro es el mejor presidente brasileño de todos los tiempos”, y afirmaba que un mitin reciente de la caravana pro-Bolsonaro entró en el Guinness World Records. Sin embargo, mi incursión en los grupos de Telegram del país reveló algo más siniestro que unos artículos manipulados. Estos grupos —que no están regulados, son extremos y desquiciados— sirven para calumniar a los enemigos del presidente y llevar a cabo una operación de propaganda en la sombra. No es de extrañar que Bolsonaro esté tan interesado en mantener una atmósfera en la que todo se vale.El objetivo primordial es el principal oponente de Bolsonaro en las elecciones de octubre, el expresidente Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. En grupos medianos pro-Bolsonaro, como “Los Patriotas” (11.782 suscriptores) y “Grupo de apoyo a Bolsonaro 2022” (25.737 suscriptores), el enfoque es implacable. Los usuarios compartieron exhaustivamente una imagen alterada digitalmente de un Da Silva sin camisa tomado de la mano con el presidente de Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro, como si hubieran sido una pareja homosexual en la década de 1980. (¿Es necesario decir que es falsa?).Las afirmaciones son interminables y extravagantes: Da Silva está patrocinado por narcotraficantes; perseguirá a las iglesias; está en contra de que los brasileños de clase media tengan más de un televisor en casa. La gente utiliza lo que pueda conseguir. Un video evidentemente satírico —que muestra a un actor, disfrazado de abogado del Partido de los Trabajadores de Da Silva, confesando el fraude electoral— se presenta como una prueba fehaciente. El nombre del abogado, que se traduce en algo así como “Me Burlo de Ellos”, debería haber dado una pista. Pero en su prisa por satanizar, los seguidores de Bolsonaro no leen las cosas con detenimiento.Detrás de esa frenética actividad hay una desesperación apenas disimulada. Da Silva supera actualmente a Bolsonaro en la encuesta más reciente con un 41 por ciento frente al 36 por ciento. La realidad de la popularidad de Da Silva es claramente demasiado dolorosa de soportar, por lo que los usuarios de Telegram se refugian en la fantasía. “Por fin una encuesta real”, dijo un usuario, asegurando que una encuestadora imaginaria ponía a Bolsonaro en primer lugar con el 65 por ciento de las intenciones de voto, frente al dieciséis por ciento de su oponente. Cuando no sirve inventar encuestas, siempre se puede suspender la carrera presidencial. “Temeroso de una detención internacional, Lula va a renunciar a su candidatura”, afirmaba otro. El deseo es casi conmovedor.Los partidarios de Bolsonaro tienen otro gran miedo: el Supremo Tribunal Federal, que ha abierto varias investigaciones sobre el presidente, sus hijos y sus aliados. En Telegram, ese escrutinio no ha sido bien recibido. La gente acusa a los magistrados de defender públicamente la violación, la pederastia, el homicidio, el narcotráfico y el tráfico de órganos. Comparten una fotografía manipulada de un magistrado posando con Fidel Castro. Comparten un video editado en el que otro juez confiesa que el Partido de los Trabajadores lo chantajea por haber participado en una orgía en Cuba. (El juez sí dijo eso, pero en realidad estaba dando un ejemplo extraño de noticias falsas en su contra, un rumor que Bolsonaro ayudó a propagar en Twitter).Se han tomado algunas medidas para frenar este diluvio de noticias falsas. Algunas plataformas de redes sociales han eliminado videos del presidente que difundían información errónea sobre la COVID-19 y el sistema de votación electrónico del país. WhatsApp decidió no introducir en Brasil una nueva herramienta llamada Comunidades, que reúne varios grupos de chats, hasta que no hayan pasado las elecciones presidenciales. En marzo, el Supremo Tribunal prohibió el uso de Telegram durante dos días porque la empresa había ignorado la petición del tribunal de eliminar una publicación engañosa sobre el sistema electoral del país en la cuenta oficial del presidente (1,34 millones de suscriptores). La empresa aceptó entonces adoptar algunas medidas contra la desinformación, entre ellas un control manual diario de los cien canales más populares de Brasil y una futura asociación con organizaciones de verificación de hechos. En el Congreso se está estudiando un imperfecto proyecto de ley sobre las noticias falsas.No es suficiente. Una investigación de la policía federal identificó hace poco un esquema orquestado —el llamado gabinete del odio— formado por los aliados más cercanos de Bolsonaro, y probablemente también sus hijos y ayudantes. El propósito del grupo es, supuestamente, identificar blancos como políticos, científicos, activistas y periodistas, y luego crear y difundir desinformación para obtener “beneficios ideológicos, partidistas y financieros”. (Todos ellos niegan las acusaciones). El problema es mucho mayor que unas cuantas publicaciones dispersas de lunáticos.Al final, no sabemos qué se puede hacer para contener de manera eficaz las enormes campañas de desinformación en las plataformas de las redes sociales, sobre todo antes de unas elecciones nacionales tan importantes. ¿Cómo podemos razonar con personas que creen que “los izquierdistas permiten matar a los bebés a los 28 días de nacer” o que “las vacunas implantan parásitos que se pueden controlar con impulsos electromagnéticos”? Algunos especialistas abogan por añadir etiquetas de comprobación de hechos, dificultar el reenvío de mensajes o introducir la verificación del usuario. Ninguna de esas medidas, supongo, haría mucho para frenar la marea de locura que encontré en Telegram.Al menos hay una solución a la que podemos recurrir: votar para que dejen su puesto los políticos de las noticias falsas.Vanessa Barbara es editora del sitio web literario A Hortaliça, autora de dos novelas y dos libros de no ficción en portugués y colaboradora de la sección de Opinión del Times. More

SIERRA VISTA, Ariz. — Kari Lake has a strategy to get elected in 2022.Keep talking about 2020.Minutes into her pitch at the Cochise County Republican headquarters in the suburbs of southern Arizona, Ms. Lake zeroed in on the presidential election 18 months ago, calling it “crooked” and “corrupt.” She claimed nearly a dozen times in a single hour that the 2020 election was stolen from Donald J. Trump, a falsehood that the audience — some of whom wore red hats reading “Trump Won” — was eager to hear. Ms. Lake, a former local Fox anchor who won Mr. Trump’s endorsement as she campaigns to become Arizona’s next governor, calls the 2020 election a key motivation in her decision to enter the race.“We need some people with a backbone to stand up for this country — we had our election stolen,” Ms. Lake said in an interview after the Cochise County event in March, adding, “I don’t know if it’s a winning issue, but it’s a winning issue when it comes to saving this country.”Republicans in many states have grown increasingly tired of the Stop the Steal movement and the push by Mr. Trump to reward election deniers and punish those who accept President Biden’s victory. At a time when Mr. Biden’s approval ratings are sinking, leaders in the party are urging candidates to focus instead on the economy, inflation and other kitchen-table issues.But 12 weeks before its Republican primary in August, Arizona shows just how firm of a grasp Mr. Trump and his election conspiracy theories still have at every level of the party, from local activists to top statewide candidates. And this week’s victory for J.D. Vance, the “Hillbilly Elegy” author who received the former president’s endorsement in the Republican primary for an Ohio Senate seat, shows that loyalty to Trumpism goes a long way in battleground states.Still, some establishment Republicans worry that party leaders have gone too far and are effectively handing the closely divided swing state to Democrats in November.“Anybody who is still re-litigating 2020 will lose the general election,” said Kathy Petsas, a Republican who has served as a precinct captain and collected signatures for several candidates this year. “I think people at home have caught on, and I don’t think a lot of our candidates have caught on.”Gov. Doug Ducey of Arizona with President Donald J. Trump in 2020. The race to replace Mr. Ducey, who cannot run again because of term limits, has become among the most expensive governor’s races in state history.Doug Mills/The New York TimesTwo forces have helped ensure election denialism remains a core issue in Arizona: the Republican-sponsored and widely derided review of the presidential vote in the state’s largest county, and Mr. Trump’s continued attacks on the Republican governor, Doug Ducey, for rebuffing his efforts to block election certification. More than three dozen Republicans running for office in Arizona — including six candidates for statewide posts — have made denying the 2020 results a centerpiece of their campaigns, according to two groups tracking candidates, States United Action and Pro-Democracy Republicans. States United Action is nonpartisan; Maricopa County’s top elections official, a Republican, began Pro-Democracy Republicans earlier this year.In interviews with more than a dozen voters at Ms. Lake’s campaign events, nearly all said “election integrity” was their top issue, and none believed that Mr. Biden was the legitimate winner of the presidential election.“We need strong Republicans to get rid of the RINOs who aren’t willing to do anything, like our governor,” said Claribeth Davis, 62, using the acronym for “Republicans in name only” to refer to Mr. Ducey. Ms. Davis, a medical aide, said she recently moved from the Phoenix suburbs to Cochise County’s Sierra Vista, a rural section of southern Arizona, to “be with more like-minded people.”Trump supporters in November 2020 gathered outside the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office in Phoenix, where ballots were being counted.Adriana Zehbrauskas for The New York TimesNumerous courts and reviews have found no evidence of widespread fraud in the 2020 election. The Republican-ordered review by Cyber Ninjas, a now-defunct company with no previous experience in elections, concluded that there had actually been even more votes for Mr. Biden and even fewer for Mr. Trump in Maricopa County. The county’s board of supervisors rebutted nearly all of the group’s claims. But none of that has tamped down the fervent belief among many Republicans that control of the country has been snatched away from them.“There’s nothing but elitists in charge,” said Suzanne Jenkins, a 75-year-old retiree who described herself as a Tea Party Republican and who drove about an hour to Sierra Vista to hear Ms. Lake speak.Understand the Ohio and Indiana Primary ElectionsTrump’s Grip: J.D. Vance’s win in Ohio’s G.O.P. Senate primary was a strong affirmation of the former president’s continued dominance of the Republican Party.How Vance Won: The author of “Hillbilly Elegy” got a big endorsement from Donald J. Trump, but a cable news megaphone and a huge infusion of spending helped pave his way to victory.Ohio Takeaways: It was a good night for Mr. Trump, and not just because of Mr. Vance. Here’s why.Winners and Losers: A progressive challenger was defeated (again) in Ohio, and a Trump-endorsed Pence (not that one) won in Indiana. These were some of the key results.There has been little political upside for moderate and more establishment Republicans in Arizona to speak out against the party’s far-right wing. Instead, the handful of them who have done so have faced protests, censure from local Republican organizations and harassment. Bill Gates, the Republican chairman of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, who has repeatedly defended the state’s 2020 election, has received death threats.“There’s not enough pushback,” said State Senator Paul Boyer, a Republican who is not running for re-election. “Because everyone is afraid of a primary.”For generations, Arizona was a reliably red state. Even as Senator John McCain fashioned himself into a moderate maverick, the state was a hotbed of conservative anti-immigration politics that helped give rise to Mr. Trump’s candidacy and presidency. Mr. McCain’s name is now invoked as an insult by conservative Republicans, including Ms. Lake.But in the last four years, voters have elected two Democratic senators and chosen a Democrat for president for the first time in more than two decades, though Republicans remain in control of the State Legislature and the governor’s mansion.Arizona has long been a source of right-wing enthusiasm for the national party. The former Maricopa County sheriff, Joe Arpaio, made national headlines in the early 2000s for his anti-immigrant policies, and in 2010 the Legislature passed what became known as the “show me your papers” law, effectively legalizing racial profiling. It was later struck down, and Mr. Arpaio is now running for mayor in a Phoenix suburb.Ms. Lake, who quit her job as an anchor for the local Fox station because of what she called its bias and dishonesty, frequently blasts the media as “brainwashed,” “immoral” and “the enemy of the people.” And her widespread name recognition has helped give her an early lead in the polls.But winning the crowded Republican primary is far from certain. Ms. Lake faces especially fierce opposition from Karrin Taylor Robson, a Phoenix-based business owner who has contributed millions to her own campaign. Already, the race to replace Mr. Ducey, who cannot run again because of term limits, has become among the most expensive governor’s races in state history, with $13.6 million in spending so far.Ms. Taylor Robson has not made the 2020 election the major focus of her campaign, but when asked whether she considered Mr. Biden the fairly elected president, she responded in a statement, “Joe Biden may be the president, but the election definitely wasn’t fair.”“We need some people with a backbone to stand up for this country — we had our election stolen,” said Kari Lake, who won Mr. Trump’s endorsement in her campaign for governor.Cassidy Araiza for The New York TimesMs. Lake says Arizona should finish the border wall that Mr. Trump began building. She has emphasized her ties to the former president, appearing with him at his rally in the state earlier this year, fund-raising with him at his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida and including his name on her campaign signs.Ms. Lake has made conspiracy theories a centerpiece of her campaign — releasing a television ad that told viewers that if they were watching the ad, they were in the middle of a “fake news” program. “You know how to know it’s fake?” she says to the camera. “Because they won’t even cover the biggest story out there: the rigged election of 2020.” She also touts her endorsement from the chief executive of MyPillow, Mike Lindell, a key financier of right-wing efforts to discredit the 2020 election.From first-time candidates to incumbents in Congress and the State Legislature, many Republicans in Arizona have increasingly embraced an extremist brand of right-wing politics.Representative Paul Gosar and State Senator Wendy Rogers both spoke at the America First Political Action Conference, a group with strong ties to white nationalists, and both were censured by their legislative bodies for their violent rhetoric and antics. Ms. Rogers and State Representative Mark Finchem, a Republican who is running for secretary of state, have acknowledged ties to the Oath Keepers militia group. Ron Watkins, who is widely believed to have played a major role in writing the anonymous posts that helped spur the pro-Trump conspiracy theory known as QAnon, is running for Congress. Jim Lamon, a Republican running for U.S. Senate, falsely claimed to be an elector for Arizona last year.Even Mr. Ducey, who was formally censured by the state Republican Party last year for his handling of the coronavirus pandemic, has acknowledged the energy on the state’s hard-right, signing a bill that will require proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections. When reporters asked about his support for Ms. Rogers, Mr. Ducey said that “she’s still better than her opponent,” a Democrat, though he later applauded the Legislature’s vote to censure her. Mark Brnovich, the Arizona attorney general who is now running for U.S. Senate, has faced repeated criticism from other Republicans, including Ms. Lake and Mr. Trump, and accusations that he is dragging out the investigation into the presidential election.Representative Paul Gosar spoke at a Trump rally in Florence, Ariz., in January.Adriana Zehbrauskas for The New York TimesState Senator Wendy Rogers, an Arizona Republican, addressed the crowd at a Trump rally. She was censured by the State Senate in March after giving a speech to a white nationalist gathering.Ross D. Franklin/Associated PressA few Republican candidates have made the economy and immigration the focus of their campaign. But even among those candidates, almost none have offered a full-throated defense of the 2020 election. Some Republicans believe that while focusing on 2020 is both irresponsible and politically unwise, it may not matter in Arizona, where the president’s approval rating is now at its lowest since he took office, a dive largely driven by independent voters.Because independent and third-party voters make up roughly 34 percent of the electorate, it is impossible to win the state with Republicans alone. Ms. Lake and other candidates like her may have already hit a ceiling even among primary voters, as polls show many voters remain undecided, and there is evidence of growing support for other candidates.“I am concerned that if these people get elected it will make another decade of craziness,” said Bob Worsley, a former state senator who describes himself as a moderate Republican. “I don’t know who has the stature to say, ‘Let’s bring this party back, bring the establishment base back into power.’ Now we’re a purple state and we don’t have a John McCain to try to crack the whip.” More

National politics may not be front and center in voters’ minds, but how they cast their ballots could signal their opinions of the main parties.LONDON — Rarely has the American political maxim “all politics is local” seemed more appropriate for an election in Britain.When voters go to the polls on Thursday to select thousands of representatives in scores of local municipalities in England, Scotland and Wales, their choices will reverberate in British national politics, potentially serving as a referendum on the Conservative Party and its scandal-scarred leader, Prime Minister Boris Johnson.Heavy Conservative losses could crystallize fears in the party that Mr. Johnson’s attendance at social gatherings that violated Covid restrictions has hopelessly tarnished his political brand — and, by extension, the party’s. That could provoke a no-confidence vote in his leadership, forcing him from office.This does not mean the scandal over Downing Street parties is uppermost in the minds of many voters. They care more about quotidian concerns such as garbage collection, road maintenance and planning rules — issues that are controlled by elected local council members.Why are the Conservatives vulnerable?The Conservatives face stiff headwinds as Britain struggles with soaring energy and food costs. The scandal over illicit parties held at Downing Street has deepened the anti-incumbent mood, leading some Conservative members of Parliament to worry that Mr. Johnson could endanger their own seats in a future general election.Although his energetic support of Ukraine and of its president, Volodymyr Zelensky, has changed the subject for now, Mr. Johnson still faces several developments that could further erode his standing.Prime Minister Boris Johnson, right, with border officers at Southampton Airport, in southern England, on Wednesday.Pool photo by Adrian DennisThe police could impose more fines on him for breaking Covid rules (he has already paid one). And a government investigator, Sue Gray, is scheduled to deliver a report on the affair that many expect will paint a damning portrait of the alcohol-fueled culture in Downing Street under Mr. Johnson.While the Conservatives trail the opposition Labour Party in polls, a rout is far from a forgone conclusion. Labour did well in 2018, the last time that many of these seats were in play, which gives it less room to advance. While it may pick off some Conservative bastions in London, it could struggle to claw back seats in the “red wall,” the industrial strongholds in the north of England where the Conservatives made inroads in 2019.Who’s voting and for what?Voting is mostly to elect “councillors,” representatives in municipalities who oversee functions like filling potholes, collecting trash and issuing construction permits. Whatever happens, there will be no change in the national government led by Mr. Johnson. Turnout is likely to be low.Elections are taking place everywhere in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, and there is also voting in parts of England. Politicians often look to the results as a test of the public mood, but some voters think more about their patch than about the big political picture. And because votes are cast only in some locations, these elections offer at best a fragmented sense of what the electorate is thinking.The leader of the Labour Party, Keir Starmer, visiting pensioners in Wakefield, northern England, on Wednesday.Molly Darlington/ReutersWhat would victory look like?Even before the first vote was cast, the parties were playing down how they expected to perform. It would be no shock on Friday, when the results pour in, if they all claim to be surprised by a better-than-expected result.That’s all part of the game, because in local elections, shaping the narrative is particularly important. In 1990, the Conservatives famously painted defeat as victory by calling attention to symbolic wins in two boroughs in London: Wandsworth and Westminster.Accordingly, the Conservatives do not appear ruffled to see predictions that they could lose 550 seats, because that sets the bar low. Labour, for its part, has dampened expectations by arguing that its strong performance four years ago, when many of the seats were last contested, gives it little room to improve.The Conservatives would like to avoid a loss of more than 350 seats, but they could brush off 100 to 150 seats as typical midterm blues. A gain of more than 100 seats would be a big success for Mr. Johnson.The Labour leader, Keir Starmer, would be disappointed if his party failed to score any significant wins; 50 to 100 seats would be a creditable performance. He also hopes to consolidate Labour’s grip in London.Which races tell a broader story about British politics?With results pouring in from across England, Scotland and Wales — as well as from elections for the Northern Ireland Assembly, where there are different dynamics at play — Friday could seem bewildering.But a handful of races may illuminate the state of British politics. In London, Conservatives will struggle to hold on to the boroughs of Wandsworth and Westminster. Conservatives have controlled Wandsworth since the days of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. Westminster, where the Downing Street scandal is a local issue, has never been out of Conservative control.In the North London borough of Barnet, where 15 percent of the population is Jewish, Labour, which had been criticized under its former leader, Jeremy Corbyn, for antisemitism, is looking for a redemptive win. Under Mr. Starmer, Labour has worked to root out antisemitism and mend its ties with British Jews.In the “red wall,” Labour’s ability to reverse Tory inroads will face a test. The Conservatives won a parliamentary by-election in Hartlepool, a port city in the northeast of England, last year. But the local election there is likely to be tight. A Conservative running for a city ward seat urged voters: “Don’t punish local Conservatives for the mistakes made in Westminster.”In Scotland, the question is whether the Conservatives can maintain gains made in the last vote in 2017, when it won the second-largest number of votes, after the Scottish National Party. Polls show that the popularity of the Tories has been damaged in Scotland by the Downing Street scandal.A mural in favor of a united Ireland alongside election posters on the Falls Road, a Catholic stronghold in Belfast, in April.Andrew Testa for The New York TimesWhat does the rise of nationalists mean for the Northern Ireland election?Elections for Northern Ireland’s legislature could deliver the most far-reaching results. The Irish nationalist party, Sinn Fein, was well placed to win the most seats, which would represent an extraordinary coming-of-age for a political party that many still associate with years of paramilitary violence.The results, not expected until Saturday, could upend the power-sharing arrangements in the North that have kept a fragile peace for two decades. In polls this past week, Sinn Fein held a consistent lead over the Democratic Unionist Party, which favors Northern Ireland’s current status as part of the United Kingdom.Sinn Fein has run a campaign that emphasizes kitchen-table concerns such as the high cost of living and health care — and that plays down its ideological commitment to Irish unification, a legacy of its ties to the Irish Republican Army.The only immediate effect of a Sinn Fein victory would be the right to name the first minister in the next government. But the unionists, who have splintered into three parties and could still end up with the largest bloc of votes, have warned that they will not take part in a government with Sinn Fein at the helm. More

The British prime minister is under fire for lockdown-breaking parties. But many voters are skeptical that the opposition can solve issues such as soaring prices.BURY, England — Oliver Henry tries not to talk politics at his barbershop to avoid inciting arguments among his customers. But when Prime Minister Boris Johnson of Britain was fined recently by the police for breaking his own coronavirus laws, the bickering at Chaps Barbers was unavoidable.“Some people despise him, and other people really love him,” he said, referring to Mr. Johnson, whose Conservative Party faces an important electoral test Thursday as the prime minister battles a swirling scandal over parties in Downing Street that flouted lockdown rules.As he trimmed a client’s hair last week, Mr. Henry said he voted for Mr. Johnson’s Conservatives in the last general election, in 2019, and, grateful for government financial support during the pandemic, was not planning to abandon the prime minister yet.Whether millions of others feel the same when they vote Thursday in elections for local municipalities could determine Mr. Johnson’s fate. His leadership is again on the line, with his own lawmakers mulling a no-confidence motion that could evict him from Downing Street — and a poor result could tip them over the edge.Bury, England. Millions voting in local elections on Thursday could determine Mr. Johnson’s fate.Mary Turner for The New York TimesOne thing that has saved Mr. Johnson so far is his reputation as an election winner, someone able to reach out to voters in places like Bury, the so-called red wall regions of the north and middle of England. These areas traditionally voted for the opposition Labour Party but largely supported Brexit and turned to the Conservatives in the 2019 general election. What happens in them on Thursday will be watched closely.Elections are taking place only in some parts of the country, with around 4,400 seats being contested in more than 140 municipalities. Voting is also taking place in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The Conservatives are braced for losses. They are trailing Labour in opinion polls, the prime minister is mired in scandal and voters are feeling the pain of spiking energy, food and other prices.But things may still not be as easy for Labour as they might seem. Many of the seats contested on Thursday were last up for grabs in 2018, when Labour did well, giving it limited room to advance.Voting is for elected representatives known as councilors in municipalities that control issues like garbage collection, highway maintenance and planning rules. Turnout will most likely be low, and many of those who cast a ballot will be thinking more about potholes than Downing Street parties.A statue of Robert Peel, a 19th century Conservative prime minister, in his hometown, Bury.Mary Turner for The New York TimesLabour is also struggling to make a big breakthrough and win back its old heartland “red wall” areas, like Bury, the birthplace of Robert Peel, a 19th century Conservative prime minister. In recent decades, the area has suffered from deindustrialization.In Bury South, it elected Labour lawmakers to Parliament for years before 2019, when the Conservatives narrowly snatched the seat. But the winner, Christian Wakeford, recently defected to Labour. James Daly, a Conservative, won the other parliamentary seat, Bury North, in 2019 by a margin of just 105 votes.If Labour is ever going to fully regain control over Bury, now should be a good time. At the Brandlesholme Community Center and Food Bank, close to Chaps Barbers, its chairwoman, Jo Warburton, sums up the situation locally in a word: “diabolical.”Meat and poultry stalls at Bury Market. Many people there are struggling with high prices.Mary Turner for The New York TimesSoaring energy bills are forcing some people to choose between eating and heating, she said, adding, “Nobody can afford to live.” Ms. Warburton recently put out a plea for additional donations after having almost run out of food to offer. Even people with jobs are increasingly in need of groceries, including one person who said she had been surviving on soup for a week, Ms. Warburton added.Because the food bank is a charity, Ms. Warburton tries to keep out of politics. But she said that while local Labour Party politicians support the center, she has had little contact with Conservatives. As for the government in London, “they haven’t got a clue about life,” she said.Across town, one Bury resident, Angela Pomfret, said she sympathized in particular with those who have young families. “I don’t know how people are able to survive,” she said. “I am 62, and I am struggling.”Ms. Pomfret said she had been unable to visit her mother, who died during the coronavirus pandemic, because of Covid restrictions, so she was at first annoyed by news about illicit parties taking place in Downing Street at the same time.But while Ms. Pomfret says she will vote for Labour, she bears no grudge against Mr. Johnson and says she is not against him personally.Polling station signs in a Bury community center that also houses the Brandlesholme food bank ahead of elections.Mary Turner for The New York TimesNor is there much hostility toward him at Bury Market, where Andrew Fletcher, serving customers at a meat and poultry stall, acknowledges that trade is a little depressed at present but does not blame the government. “I will be voting Tory,” he said. “I don’t think Labour could do any better.”Trevor Holt, who has spent 39 years as an elected member of Bury Council for the Labour Party and twice served as the town’s mayor, is convinced that Mr. Johnson is a big liability for the Tories.“I think Boris Johnson is very unpopular, people think he’s either a fool or a crook — and he’s probably both, isn’t he?” he said with a laugh, drinking tea in a cafe at a building he opened as mayor in 1997. The cost of living is also eroding support for the Conservatives, he added. His expectations are cautious, however, and he thinks that Labour will “gain some seats” rather than sweep to a big victory.Trevor Holt, who has spent 39 years as an elected member of Bury Council for the Labour Party and twice served as the town’s mayor, is convinced that Mr. Johnson is a big liability for the Tories.Mary Turner for The New York TimesLabour currently controls Bury Council, and that means that it takes the blame for many things that go wrong locally as well as for some unpopular policies.Moves to build more homes on green spaces have provoked opposition, as have plans for a clean air zone, a proposal — now being reconsidered after protests — that would charge for journeys in some more polluting vehicles.To complicate matters, there is also a fringe party campaigning for more support for an area of Bury called Radcliffe. In the Royal Oak pub, Mike Smith, a councilor for the party, Radcliffe First, who is running for re-election, describes his patch as “an archetypal forgotten ‘red-wall’ town,” comparing it to Springfield, the fictional setting of “The Simpsons.”“If they need to build a sewage works, they’ll try to put it in Radcliffe,” he said.Campaigners and candidates for the Radcliffe First political party at the Royal Oak pub in Bury after canvassing for votes.Mary Turner for The New York TimesAt another table in the pub, which filled steadily before a soccer match was screened, Martin Watmough described Mr. Johnson as “an absolute charlatan,” and said he would support Labour in the local elections, adding that the Conservatives had lost the trust of many voters.But Nick Jones, the leader of the Conservatives on Bury Council, is bullish, considering the political headwinds against his party generated by the lockdown party scandal. He is hoping to win a handful of seats.Mr. Jones is campaigning not so much for the prime minister as against Labour’s record locally. Speaking in another pub in Bury, he highlighted issues including the clean air zone plan, the state of the highways (“a disgrace,” in his opinion) and the frequency of refuse collections.Nick Jones, leader of the Conservatives on Bury Council, is bullish and hoping to win a handful of seats. Mary Turner for The New York TimesWhen the conversation turns to Mr. Johnson, who visited Bury last week, Mr. Jones is careful to be loyal.But his political pitch has little to do with a scandal-prone prime minister, whose immediate fate could depend on results of elections like these.The message to the voters in Bury, Mr. Jones said, is: “We are not talking about Downing Street, we are talking about your street.” More